By Joanne Anderson
Let’s face it, this language of ours can be an awkward beast. Strange spellings, changing meanings, shifting conventions, rules assorted generations were taught that may or may not hold up to scrutiny. Then there are the new words for which we have the internet to thank, or curse. Some stick, some die a rapid and merciless death. Oh, and to the list can be added the Americanisms that constantly beat on our door.
We have long produced a style guide to help our journalists write in an engaging way with clarity and consistency.Credit: Dominic Lorrimer
As is the case with other major news organisations, we have long produced a style guide to help our journalists navigate the pitfalls and write in an engaging way with clarity and consistency. We’re not aiming to be at the cutting edge of English usage, but we recognise language changes and don’t want to appear stuck in the past.
That balancing act makes for interesting, sometimes highly amusing, sometimes passionate newsroom conversations among wordsmiths working in a hectic environment. Go back many decades and the debate could well have been about whether married women should be referred to only by their husband’s first and last names (Mrs John Porter) or whether insults such as “bosh twaddler” were fit for public consumption.
As chief desk editor of The Age, I work in a team preparing reporters’ copy for publication online and in print. I have also spent much time of late thinking about matters stylish while working with colleagues at The Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian Financial Review to update our shared style guide. The guide, which runs to about 250 pages, was last revised in 2014-15, and it’s fair to say a lot has happened since then. Did I hear someone whisper COVID-19?
Our updated guide, which has been made public, is a more streamlined affair. By far the most controversial change was the decision to drop honorifics most of the time, which we implemented in April. In this more informal era, we felt it appropriate to join other major news organisations, such as the Guardian and even the London Times, that have taken this step. While routine use of Mr, Ms and Mrs is out, titles such as Dr or Professor will, of course, still be used at first reference when needed to establish someone’s credentials.
Honorifics were already absent from much of our copy. Comment, sport and culture articles are prime examples. Our world desk staged a minor rebellion (staff must have been reading too many coup stories) several years ago and dropped them as a matter of practicality – major news agencies do not use them. The last areas still standing by them were general news and business.
The announcement of the change drew hundreds of reader comments, many applauding the move, many unimpressed. Some readers asked if the Queen would now be merely “Windsor”. Regardless of anyone’s views on the republican debate, there’s a short answer to that: no.
A few comments we received from the “against” camp:
“Sloppy and messy. Titles should still be used in some contexts. It’s rude to be so informal all the time.”
“I usually start letters to the editor with ‘Dear Sir/Madam’. Should I now start with ‘Hey, you!‘?”
“Civilisation is easily lost.”
And from the “for” camp:
“Congratulations – I always thought it a little classist that politicians and business people were perhaps thought sufficiently important to have honorifics while others went without.”
“Brilliant! Honorifics are a relic of class-driven cringe and should have gone out with button-up boots.”
“Glad to hear some ‘nothing words’ removed. How about we get rid of AM, QC, etc?”
Elsewhere in the guide, we’ve decided to streamline our approach to giving capital letters to the titles of holders of high public office. Capitals now appear only if the title is mentioned in the same breath as the name of the incumbent. So, “Prime Minister Harry Potter said …” but, “The prime minister has stepped out for a spell.”
We’ve pondered what to do about the plethora of companies that go out of their way to use spelling, spacing, punctuation and mixes of capitals and non-capital letters in, to put it mildly, highly creative ways. We’re willing to let them get away with it (mostly), with a few tweaks for readability, and sometimes sanity’s sake.
Our style guide is just that, a guide. It can’t possibly cover all circumstances or create total consistency. It does, however, give practical advice on dealing with issues that arise in our copy every day. It will no doubt keep on sparking debates and, with a bit of luck, it will resolve a few of them.
You can find the guide here.